Lee Hsien Yang says ministerial committee did not discuss considerations with him
Danson Cheong, The Straits Times
Jun 29, 2017 06:00 am
The younger son of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew yesterday called into question Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean’s account of discussions they had about options for his late father’s house at 38, Oxley Road.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang said in a Facebook post that the ministerial committee tasked to consider the options did not disclose its considerations to him.
He also said all his discussions with DPM Teo on “options for the house occurred long before the formation of the committee and only with him in his personal capacity”.
His response yesterday morning to a statement DPM Teo made the previous night is the latest development in the dispute between the three Lee siblings over the fate of the house.
A statement by DPM Teo on Tuesday night had said that both he and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had spoken of “a range of viable intermediate options” for the house.
One of them was the building of a memorial park on the site.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling have said that they have never asked the Government to let them demolish the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s house immediately.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang, in his response, said DPM Teo’s statement implies that the committee had disclosed to him and his sister the options it was considering in earlier exchanges.
It did not, he said, and added: “Their letters largely focused on parroting LHL’s (Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s) attacks on our father’s will.”
The ongoing dispute began on June 14, when Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, posted a six-page statement on Facebook alleging that their older brother, PM Lee, had abused his power and wanted to preserve the Oxley Road house for political gain.
In his Tuesday statement, DPM Teo also said the ministerial committee was not bent on preventing the demolition of the house, as Mr Lee Hsien Yang may believe. He reiterated that the committee was set up to study and set out “the range of possible options for the house”.
Cabinet will decide on which option to take only when Dr Lee no longer lives there, he said.
DPM Teo also said he had verbally told Mr Lee Hsien Yang his personal views on some of the options, such as demolishing the house but keeping the basement dining room with a heritage centre attached.
continue reading here :
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/lee...iderations-him
And so the drama now widens .
Goh Meng Seng: Potential Defamation Unanswered
June 28th, 2017 | Author: Contributions
It is really unusual for PAP government, especially its Prime Minister and Ministers, to allow highly Defamatory allegations made without a hawkish response to sue the pants off of those who made it. This is especially so when such potentially Defamatory allegations are made by influential individuals in the society or its opponents in politics.
Thus, many Singaporeans are puzzled why would the current slate of Ministers and PM allow LHY and LWL to continue their attacks which are all potentially highly defamatory against PM Lee and his Ministers to go unanswered.
Many PAP apologists may say that PM Lee didn’t want to aggravate the situation by launching legal actions against his own siblings. But what about his Ministers? Does it mean that all along, their reputation which was valued by past defamation lawsuits to worth hundreds of thousands and millions, had suddenly become valueless?
Of course, many Singaporeans were quickly reminded by some activists of what GCT and LKY had said about PAP Ministers must always defend their own reputation and integrity when they were defamed.
It is kind of irony here to have LKY’s own children to break that mythical justification which was used against lots of past and present opposition members and activists.
Many people had asked Why Why Why didn’t PM Lee and his Ministers take legal actions against LWL and LHY.
Actually, LWL has unintentionally let the cat out of the bag. She mentioned that the very first joint statement with her brother LHY, was supposed to be longer but was edited away by their LAWYERs. Why do they need lawyers to vet through their statement? Of course it is to make sure that the statement, when challenged, is defensible. This is especially so for the defamatory parts.
But yet, after their lawyers vet through their statement, it still carries a few explosive allegations which is potentially defamatory if found untrue.
It would then mean that their lawyers are satisfied that all the sentences, allegations made in that statement is fully back up by solid evidence!
This is not the usual type of impromptu attacks we see on the internet. It is a carefully planned and executed attack launched by both LHY and LWL.
If you are observant enough, whenever PM Lee or his Ministers try to deny or rebut some of the allegations stated in the first joint statement, LHY will come up with rebuttal furnished and supported with “FACTS” and evidence, mostly from the huge archive of emails!
It really makes one wonder HOW MUCH EVIDENCE have they prepared before launching the joint statement!
continue reading here :
Lee Hsien Yang: Serious concerns with PM Lee’s attempt to cover and whitewash himself in Parliament on 3 July
Posted on June 29, 2017 by Terry Xu
Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) voices concerns over Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s upcoming Parliamentary session on 3 July to address the allegations made by LHY and his sister, Dr Lee Weiling (LWL) have been making for the past two weeks and that the two have no confidence that a fair, transparent or complete account of events will be told in Parliament.
In his Facebook post on Thursday, LHY wrote, “We have serious concerns with Lee Hsien Loong’s attempt to cover-up and whitewash himself in Parliament on 3 July 2017. We have begun to show evidence of his misuse of his position and influence to drive his personal agenda. This is yet another example.”
LHY and his sister, Dr Lee Weiling (LWL) have been accusing their elder brother, PM Lee of abusing his powers and position as Prime Minister for personal agenda. Both of them issued a joint statement on 14 June delivering harsh criticisms of PM Lee, saying that they are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of their brother and the role of his wife, Ho Ching. The three are children of late founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who passed away on 23 March 2015 and his property at 38 Oxley Road is the centre of the allegations and dispute.
PM Lee has earlier made a public statement on 19 June to apologise for the dispute between him and his siblings. Apart from apologising for the matter, he said that he will make a ministerial statement to refute the allegations made against him and will subject himself to questioning by the Members of Parliament on 3 July with party whip lifted for his party.
LHY notes in his Facebook post that the impending Parliamentary session is a forum that again places his brother before his subordinates and the lack of evidence that would be available in the Parliament session. He also highlights the many instances of Ministers providing cover for PM Lee prior to the 3 July “questioning”.
“They lack both sufficient background and evidence of the numerous instances of abuse and conflicts of interest, many yet to be raised. Even before the session, many of them appear to have felt obliged to give him cover. Many MPs will fear career repercussions if they speak out against their superior. Historically, few PAP MPs have dared to dissent even when the party whip was lifted.” wrote LHY. Which is true, and for those MPs who dared to dissent are given the cold treatment, such as Dr Tan Cheng Bock, former MP of Ayer Rajah SMC, who voiced against the Non-constituency Member of Parliament Scheme when the party whip was lifted.
LHY notes that there will be no opportunity or adequate time for evidence to be properly drawn together, placed before Parliament, and considered by the Members of Parliament. He also highlights that there will not be any opportunity for an examining body to properly probe explanations or excuses that are presented.
“A Parliamentary session is not the correct forum for investigations of this nature.” wrote LHY and states that they have no confidence that a fair, transparent or complete account of events will be told at the Parliamentary session with only PM Lee’s side of the story being aired. Pointing that there is no promise of truthfulness in PM Lee’s Parliamentary statement due to the parliamentary privilege, LHY notes that it could also be an opportunity for PM Lee to continue to mislead or insinuate under the privilege.
Under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act, no Member shall be liable to any civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages by reason of any matter or thing which he may have brought before Parliament or a committee by petition, bill, resolution, motion, or otherwise or may have said in Parliament or in committee.
“We believe that key issues such as his abuse of power will be simply swept under the carpet. The accused controls both process and outcome in this forum.”
So far, many politicians and journalists have voiced their opinions, stating that the Parliament is not an appropriate forum to address the allegations put forth by the two siblings as they will not be allowed to present their side of the story in Parliament and the seriousness of the matter warrants a committee of inquiry to have the matter thoroughly scrutinised. The seriousness of the matter has even warranted the Public Service Division to carry out a poll to determine the damage on the trust of public institution.
continue reading here :
A PAP split is on the cards
June 29th, 2017 | Author: Contributions
After the ferocious attacks launched by Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Wei Ling, the political strength of PM Lee Hsien Loong has been severely affected. In order to shore up his political support, he has asked various cabinet ministers to stand up and speak for him publicly. They include the two DPMs, Teo Chee Hean and Tharman. Minister Shanmugam had got himself embroiled and so has Minister Lawrence Wong. Indranee Rajah got in on the act too, even former PM Goh Chok Tong, and the list goes on.
It is well-know that PAP has a rule that if they are defamed, they need to sue or leave the cabinet. But PM Lee is not suing, instead, he is waging his whole party in a show hand bet by having a parliament session to debate allegation of abuse of power by his brother. Understandably, it would be difficult to sue a family member, but PM Lee can’t stop those who think that a party and a country is bigger than his family. And since, his brother has started the attacks on PM Lee and essentially his cabinet ministers, these allegations must be dealt with swiftly and decisively.
The way PM Lee handles this crisis would make or break his leadership position within the PAP. If he doesn’t come out of this fight victorious, he might be forced into early retirement and an inexperienced team would have to takeover the helm in this current climate of global uncertainty. Those who have supported PM Lee would likely have to bow off the stage together with their leader. So it won’t be surprising if some party leaders would be careful and hedge carefully while keeping their silence.
continue reading here :
38 Oxley Road dispute: ‘No confidence’ that complete account will be told in Parliament, says Lee Hsien Yang
29 Jun 2017 05:35PM (Updated: 29 Jun 2017 06:25PM)
SINGAPORE: Mr Lee Hsien Yang said on Thursday (Jun 29) that he has “no confidence” that a “fair, transparent or complete account of events” will be told in Parliament when his brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong addresses the dispute involving their childhood home at 38 Oxley Road.
“Only his side of the story will air, with no promise of truthfulness due to parliamentary privilege,” Mr Lee said on his Facebook page.
He added: “We believe that key issues such as his abuse of power will be simply swept under the carpet. The accused controls both process and outcome in this forum.”
PM Lee has promised to deal with the allegations when Parliament sits on Jul 3, saying that the “baseless accusations” against him and the Government must be dealt with openly. He also invited all Members of Parliament to question him and his Cabinet colleagues vigorously on the matter.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang, however, reiterated that a parliamentary session is “not the correct forum for investigations of this nature,” and said the sitting on Jul 3is another example of the Prime Minister misusing his position to drive his personal agenda.
“This parliamentary session is a forum that again places Hsien Loong before his subordinates. They lack both sufficient background and evidence of the numerous instances of abuse and conflicts of interest, many yet to be raised,” Mr Lee wrote on Facebook. “Many MPs will fear career repercussions if they speak out against their superior.”
Read more at
Sons, mothers, money and memory: theories about the Lee Kuan Yew family feud
By Zuraidah Ibrahim/Bhavan Jaipragas
29 Jun 2017
Who’s who in the Lee Kuan Yew family feud
‘Take it to court, lah!’: Lion City captivated as personal details emerge in siblings’ fight over estate of founding leader
Family quarrels, cold wars: emails put Lee Kuan Yew’s private life on show as daughter’s feud with Singapore PM heats up
The relatives of Singapore’s late founding leader have descended into publicly fighting over his estate. Here’s how to tell your Lee Hsien Loong from your Lee Hsien Yang
In Singapore, the President’s Scholarship represents the pinnacle of educational achievement and the promise of a high-flying career in public service. Awarded to a select few top performers in each pre-university cohort, it reflects Singapore’s belief in harnessing elite talent, an obsession of its late founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew.
Lee’s family is full of President’s Scholars. He and his wife, both Cambridge-educated lawyers, had three children. All three became President’s Scholars. As ordained, they dutifully rose to the top of their respective spheres. The scions of other Southeast Asian political families – the Marcoses of the Philippines, the Suhartos of Indonesia or the Razaks of Malaysia – included at least some individuals who let their hair down, to put it mildly. But the Lees of Singapore were the goody-two-shoes of the block, the epitome of self-discipline, diligence and responsibility.
Family quarrels, cold wars: emails put Lee Kuan Yew’s private life on showp
Last Wednesday morning, however, Singapore was rocked by the revelation of an explosive feud within the Lee family. The spat had surfaced last year, then appeared to subside. But this time, out of the blue, it was clear that things had reached breaking point.
The dysfunctional relationship among the Lee siblings might have stayed behind closed doors but for two inconvenient details. First, they were fighting over the house of Lee Kuan Yew, the man who was virtually synonymous with Singapore for five decades. Second, the eldest among the siblings is the current Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong.
Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Photo: AFP
So, when his younger siblings declared on Wednesday that he was unfit for his job – and this in a country where lesser accusations have been punished with crippling defamation suits – a shocked Singapore and the world took notice.
Since Wednesday, Singaporeans have been glued to their social media feeds barely able to believe the volleys of accusations and counter-accusations between the Lees. For Hong Kong-based Singaporean writer Toh Han Shih, the fallout was reminiscent of King Lear or the Mahabharata. The comparison is not out of place, because in Singapore, dominated by the Lees for most of its citizens’ lifetimes, this really is a drama of epic proportions; a storm among the gods.
A FAMILY PORTRAIT
Lee Kuan Yew died in March 2015. He was known for his intellect, determination, and hard edge. Lee Hsien Loong, who became Prime Minister in 2004, is steeped in the same sense of duty, but without his father’s killer instincts. In addition to leading the extremely effective People’s Action Party (PAP), he is personally popular. The PAP’s strong showing in the last general election, scoring 70 per cent of the popular vote, was partly attributed to public sympathy for Lee Hsien Loong after he had lost his father.
Was Lee Kuan Yew rushed into signing his last will?p
He lost his first wife to a heart attack when they were in their early 30s, not long after giving birth to a son who suffered from albinism. He later married Ho Ching, a scientist – and President’s Scholar. She rose to become chief executive of Singapore’s mammoth investment fund, Temasek Holdings. She has held that post for the past 15 years. Last year, Ho Ching ranked number 30 in the Forbes’ list of most powerful women in the world.
continue reading here :
Chief of govt comms Janadas Devan responds to Lee Wei Ling’s post on Hsien Yang’s FB
Kena dragged in, better issue reply.
By Jeanette Tan | 3 hours
[CORRECTION on Friday at 12:30pm: We’re sorry that we got this story wrong in a previous version of this article, which we’ve since edited. Janadas posted his comment on Lee Hsien Yang’s Facebook page, on a post where he shared Wei Ling’s photo. It still remains.]
On Friday morning, we saw a post from Lee Wei Ling that dragged a new player into the ongoing Lee saga.
It quoted a 2011 email from Janadas Devan, Chief of Singapore’s government communications division, which appears to show, in no uncertain terms, that the late Lee Kuan Yew was clear in his intention to demolish the house on 38, Oxley Road.
Wei Ling has for some time had comments on her posts disabled, but her posts are shared by her brother Hsien Yang, so at about 9:45am, Janadas left a comment on the latter’s Facebook share of the photo.
Here are screenshots of the comment he posted:
Screenshots from Lee Wei Ling’s Facebook page
Which we’ve copied out here:
“Dear Wei Ling: Your latest post blares, tabloid-style, misleading information. Having edited you for many years, I know this is not your style.
The email you quote was written when I was Associate Editor of Straits Times, not Chief of Government Communications. And as you know well, I had met Mr Lee Kuan Yew with a few other journalists to discuss a book that he had proposed on 38 Oxley Rd.
continue reading here :
Lee Weiling presents email which contradicts PM Lee’s statutory declaration to Ministerial Committee
Posted on June 30, 2017 by Terry Xu
Dr Lee Weiling has released an email from Janadas Devan, Chief of Government Communications at the Ministry of Communication and Information that was sent in 2011 which seems to contradict the version of story that was allegedly declared by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his statutory declaration to the Ministerial Committee.
Dr Lee who is the sister of PM Lee, posted an image on her Facebook page showing two screenshots of two documents.
One showing an alleged part of the declaration made by PM Lee to the Ministerial Committee formed to deliberate on the government’s decision on the property at 38 Oxley Road, he allegedly states,
“Soon after the meeting Mr Lee asked me for my views on whether 38 Oxley Road would be retained as heritage site. Given the strong views expressed by the Ministers during the Cabinet meeting of 21 July 2011, which also tied in with my own assessment of the public sentiment, I told Mr Lee that I felt that Cabinet was unlikely to agree to demolish the House after he died.
Mr Lee then took a number of steps which put beyond a doubt that he came to accept Cabinet’s position.”
(This is the first time that this statement is seen in public as PM Lee only released a summary of his declaration which did not address this point.)
The second showed an email from Janadas which was sent on 28 July 2011, a few days after the stated Cabinet meeting. The email wrote,
“Saw MM today. First meeting on Oxley book, together with team. He was in good form. He said house will be torn down. It is obvious that is what he wants. It will be a small minded people that denies him this personal wish. I think he’s wrong wishing it, but I’d feel awful denying what he obviously wants.”
Not the first time that LKY’s demolishment wish on 38 Oxley Road was said
In fact, what Janadas wrote is as what PM Lee himself implied in his speech on 13 April 2015 over the passing of Lee Kuan Yew.
He said,
“There have also been calls to turn Mr Lee’s home, 38 Oxley Road, into a museum and a memorial to him. But Mr Lee was adamant that 38 Oxley Road should be demolished after his passing. He wrote formally to the Cabinet at least twice to put his wishes on the record – once soon after my mother his wife had died, and the second time soon after he had stepped down from office in 2011. He said, talking about Oxley Road, that “it should not be kept as a kind of relic”. He said that he had seen too many other houses of famous people “kept frozen in time … as a monument with people tramping in and out”. They invariably “become shabby”, in his words. My mother also felt strongly about this. She was most distressed at the thought of people coming through her private spaces after she and my father had passed away, to see how they had lived.
Mr Lee stated his view on this matter in one of his books, Hard Truths. This caused a public reaction, as some people wanted the house preserved. So, in December 2011, after he had retired from the Cabinet, and after he had written to us the second time, I held a special Cabinet meeting and invited Mr Lee to attend, in order to discuss 38 Oxley Road.
The Ministers tried hard to change his mind. After the meeting, Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet, and I quote from his letter:
“Cabinet members were unanimous that 38 Oxley Road should not be demolished as I wanted. I have reflected on this and decided that if 38 Oxley Road is to be preserved, it needs to have its foundations reinforced and the whole building refurbished. It must then be let out for people to live in. An empty building will soon decline and decay.” End of the quote and that was the letter.
Two years later, in December 2013, Mr Lee made his will. He appointed my brother Mr Lee Hsien Yang and sister Dr Lee Wei Ling as his executors and trustees. Mr Lee wrote, in paragraph 7 of his will, and I quote:
“I further declare that it is my wish, and the wish of my late wife, KWA GEOK CHOO, that our house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629 (‘the House’) be demolished immediately after my death or, if my daughter, Wei Ling, would prefer to continue living in the original house, immediately after she moves out of the House. I would ask each of my children to ensure our wishes with respect to the demolition of the House be carried out. If our children are unable to demolish the House as a result of any changes in the law, rules or regulations binding them, it is my wish that the House never be opened to others except my children, their families and descendants. My view on this has been made public before and remains unchanged. My statement of wishes in this paragraph 7 may be publicly disclosed notwithstanding that the rest of my Will is private.”
Mr Lee’s position on 38 Oxley Road was unwavering over the years, and fully consistent with his lifelong values. We should respect his wishes, as well as those of Mrs Lee.
Dr Lee Wei Ling has informed me that she intends to continue living in the house at 38 Oxley Road. Therefore, there is no immediate issue of demolition of the house, and no need for the Government to make any decision now.
If and when Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lives in the house, Mr Lee has stated his wishes as to what then should be done. At that point, speaking as a son, I would like to see these wishes carried out. However, it will be up to the Government of the day to consider the matter.”
For those who have been following the on-going Lee family saga would be familiar with the accusations made by the children of late Lee Kuan Yew, LWL and Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) upon their elder brother with allegations of him abusing his powers and position as Prime Minister for his personal agenda.
Both of them issued a joint statement on 14 June delivering harsh criticisms of PM Lee, saying that they are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of their brother and the role of his wife, Ho Ching.
While the media and the Ministers under PM Lee have been painting the issue as one that is about the property of 38 Oxley Road, how LKY was not one-minded to have his property demolished, how the younger brother intends to profit from selling the plot of land and a matter of family dispute between the Lee siblings.
continue reading here :
Lee Wei Ling, Janadas exchange words over Oxley Road spat
Published: 1:00 PM, June 30, 2017
Updated: 1:24 PM, June 30, 2017
SINGAPORE – Dr Lee Wei Ling and chief of Government Communications Janadas Devan exchanged words on Facebook on Friday morning (June 30) over the ongoing Oxley Road saga.
In a post at 7.20am, Dr Lee put up an email from Mr Janadas, dated July 28, 2011 as a rebuttal to what she referred to as claims by her elder brother Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong that their father had “come to accept” that the family home should be preserved after July 21, 2011.
In the email, Mr Janadas wrote that he met Mr Lee Kuan Yew that day, July 28, and Mr Lee told him that the house will be torn down. Saying it is “obvious” that is what Mr Lee Kuan Yew wants, Mr Janadas added: “It will be a small minded people that denies him this personal wish. I think he’s wrong wishing it, but I’d feel awful denying him what he obviously wants.”
Juxtaposing Mr Janadas’ email with a snippet of PM Lee’s statutory declaration, she wrote: “We thought that Singaporeans should hear directly from Janadas Devan, chief of Government Communications at the Ministry of Communication and Information.”
The post was immediately shared by her younger brother Lee Hsien Yang.
continue reading here :
9 weeks’ jail for butcher who threw ofo bike from 15th floor
By Siau Ming En
Published: 8:10 PM, June 30, 2017
SINGAPORE — A 47-year-old butcher was sentenced to nine weeks’ jail on Friday (June 30) for throwing a yellow ofo bicycle from the 15th floor of a Housing Development Board (HDB) block at Upper Boon Keng Road last week.
Selamat Mohamed Ali was convicted of one count of committing a rash act that endangered human life on June 22. Another charge of dishonestly converting a yellow ofo bicycle to his own use was taken into consideration for sentencing.
The court heard that at about 5am on June 21, Selamat was heading home after a drinking session in Orchard Towers, when he decided not to return to his flat at Blk 11 in Upper Boon Keng Road.
Instead, he took a lift to the 15th-floor lift landing of the block to rest.
About half an hour later, he became worried about where he would stay as he had overheard that his uncle wanted to sell the flat, Deputy Public Prosecutor Dwayne Lum told the court.
Selamat then spotted two yellow ofo bicycles at the lift landing, which were left there by an employee of the bicycle-sharing company. The latter could not return them as there was no available vehicle to transport the bicycles.
The employee, whose job is to collect bicycles that belong to the company, is also living at a unit on that floor.
Selamat carried one of the bicycles and threw it over the corridor parapet of the 15th floor.
He did not check if there was anyone at the ground floor of the block before doing so. He also did not check if the bicycle had landed on anyone, or if anyone was hurt by his act, said DPP Lum.
continue reading here :